Poverty Is a Choice
Extreme poverty has declined, but the line is very low.
We live in what often feels like a biblically terrible time, marked by mass extinctions, deep recessions, epidemics, climate emergencies, inequality, and forever wars. But one thing, at least, has gotten better. More than 1 billion people have escaped extreme poverty—so many, so fast, that the world might be able to declare, within a decade, the end of this most miserable form of deprivation. “The global poverty rate is now lower than it has ever been in recorded history,” Jim Yong Kim, a former president of the World Bank, recently argued . “This is one of the greatest human achievements of our time.”
Or perhaps not. In an acidic rebuke to world leaders, the outgoing United Nations special rapporteur on poverty and human rights, Philip Alston, argues that the effort to end global poverty has failed. More people live in deprivation now than two decades ago. “We squandered a decade in the fight against poverty, with misplaced triumphalism blocking the very reforms that could have prevented the worst impacts of the pandemic,” Alston wrote in his last report .
So who’s right: Alston or Kim? The pessimistic argument is a hard one to make when looking at the raw, headline numbers. The global extreme-poverty rate fell from 36 percent in 1990 to 10 percent in 2015; the number of poor people dropped from 2 billion to 700 million. But Alston believes that by focusing only on those numbers, the world is deluding itself.
Read: A moral case for giving people money
The divisions between the World Bank’s economists and the UN’s special rapporteur are in some sense technical, about where to set the poverty line. They are in a more important sense interpretive, about whether progress has been fast or slow, and whether today’s global poverty counts are laudable or tragic.
This is a realm of yes-and s and no-but s, not direct refutations. Extreme poverty has declined rapidly, but the extreme-poverty line is very low: A person living below it spends no more than $1.90 a day, enough in many poor countries to cover some starch, a few fruits and vegetables, some cooking oil, a bit of protein, and that’s about it—with nothing left over for utilities, education, health care, transportation, or investment in wealth-generating assets, such as a cow or a motorbike. That poverty threshold represents “a staggeringly low standard of living, well below any reasonable conception of a life with dignity,” Alston argues—it is a catastrophic-destitution measure, not a poverty measure. He emphasizes the lack of progress made at the $3.20-a-day and $5.50-a-day poverty lines, too. Half the world lives on less than the latter figure.
Alston takes issue with the fact that the World Bank’s extreme-poverty line is an absolute measure, not a relative one: It sets a line and sees how many people cross it, country by country, rather than pegging the poverty threshold to median income, country by country. But “relative poverty is what really counts these days,” Alston told me, as it captures social exclusion, and the way that living on a few dollars a day is more challenging in middle-income countries like India and Kenya than in low-income countries like Afghanistan and Chad. “In a poorer country,” the bank itself explains , “participating in the job market may require only clothing and food, whereas someone in a richer society may also need access to the internet, transportation, and a cell phone.”
The bank also acknowledges that the global extreme-poverty line is low. It has generated a measure that includes relative poverty, and produces counts at the $3.20-a-day and $5.50-a-day lines. Its economists, researchers, and program experts stress that rising above the extreme-poverty line is no guarantee against malnutrition, stunted growth, early death, or any of the other horrible consequences of destitution.
But Alston’s most controversial, and most important, argument is that the focus on progress measured against the $1.90-a-day line—the prevalence of “everything’s getting better” arguments, made by Davos types like Bill Gates and Steven Pinker —has hampered progress toward true poverty eradication, and toward civil rights, social inclusion, and a basic standard of living for all. “By being able to rely so heavily on the World Bank's flagship figure, they can say, ‘Look, progress has been consistent. We’ve been doing great,’” Alston told me. “The implication of that is that the triumph of neoliberalism has brought with it very significant benefits for poor people. In reality, that’s just not the case.”
Read: How many people in the world are actually poor?
What if world leaders and multilateral institutions focused on the $5.50 line, or measures of poverty that capture social exclusion and relative deprivation? What if the headline story were that half the world still qualifies as desperately poor, and poverty head counts remain stubbornly high in dozens of countries? What if the story were not that we are succeeding, but that we are failing?
That story would not capture all the good that has happened in terms of infant-mortality rates falling, school-enrollment numbers rising, and malnutrition fading. But it would hold the world accountable for the fact that poverty is, always and everywhere, a choice. Alston’s view, and a necessary one, is that the world cannot wait for economic expansion to lift people above the poverty line. It cannot count on trade compacts and infrastructure projects and the ticking of GDP growth rates from 2.3 to 3.2 percent to do it. It needs direct interventions by governments, as fast as possible, to eliminate inequality and build safety nets, even in the poorest places.
Extreme poverty: How far have we come, and how far do we still have to go?
The world has made immense progress against extreme poverty, but it is still the reality for almost one in ten people worldwide..
Two centuries ago, the majority of the world population was extremely poor. Back then, it was widely believed that widespread poverty was inevitable. But this turned out to be wrong. Economic growth is possible, and poverty can decline. The world has made immense progress against extreme poverty.
But even after two centuries of progress, extreme poverty is still the reality for every tenth person in the world. This is what the ‘international poverty line’ highlights – this metric plays an important (and successful) role in focusing the world’s attention on the very poorest people in the world.
The poorest people today live in countries that have achieved no economic growth. This stagnation of the world’s poorest economies is one of the largest problems of our time. Unless this changes, hundreds of millions of people will continue to live in extreme poverty.
The state of poverty today
There are poor people in every country, people who live in poor housing and who struggle to afford basic goods and services like heating, transport, and healthy food for themselves and their families.
The definition of poverty differs from country to country, but in high-income countries, the poverty line is around $30 per day . 1
Even in the world’s richest countries, a substantial share of people – between every 10th and every 5th person – lives below this poverty line.
In the map below, and in all international poverty statistics on Our World in Data, the data is adjusted for inflation and cross-country differences in the price level. The expandable section below the map provides a more detailed explanation of how.
Basics of global poverty measurement
Throughout this article – and in global income and expenditure data generally – the statisticians who produce these figures are careful to make these numbers as comparable as possible.
Non-monetary sources of income are taken into account
Many poor people today and in the past rely on subsistence farming and do not have a monetary income. To take this into account and make a fair comparison of their living standards, the statisticians that produce these figures estimate the monetary value of their home production and add it to their income/expenditure.
Differences in purchasing power and inflation are taken into account
The data is expressed in international dollars . This is a hypothetical currency that results from price adjustments across time and place. 2 An international dollar is defined as having the same purchasing power as one US-$ in the US . This means no matter where in the world a person is living on int.-$30, they can buy the goods and services that cost $30 in the US. None of these adjustments are ever going to be perfect, but in a world where price differences are large, it is important to attempt to account for these differences as well as possible, and this is what these adjustments do. 3
Throughout this text, I’m always adjusting incomes for price changes over time and price differences between countries in this way. All dollar values discussed here are presented in int.-$; the UN does the same for the $2.15 poverty line. Sometimes I leave out ‘international’ as it is awkward to repeat it all the time; but every time I mention any $ amount in this text, I’m referring to international-$ and not US-$. 4
Global data is a mix of income and expenditure data
There is no global survey of incomes: researchers need to rely on the available national surveys. Such surveys are designed with cross-country comparability in mind, but because they reflect the circumstances and priorities of individual countries, there are some important differences across countries. In most high-income countries, the surveys capture people’s incomes, while in poorer countries, these surveys tend to capture people’s consumption.
The two concepts are closely related: the income of a household equals their consumption plus any saving (or minus any borrowing). When speaking about these statistics, it would therefore be accurate to speak about ‘the income of people in richer countries and the monetary value of consumption in poorer countries’. But since it’d be a bit much to repeat this every time, researchers simply speak of ‘living standards’ or ‘income’ instead. I do the same in this text.
We can apply this $30-a-day-poverty-line to the global income distribution to see the share in poverty as judged by the definition of poverty in high-income countries. 5
The latest global data tells us that the huge majority – 84% of the world population – live on less than $30 per day. That means 6.7 billion people.
Why is an extremely low poverty line necessary?
Extreme poverty is defined by the UN as living on less than $2.15 a day. Why do we need a poverty line that is so extremely low?
It is not enough to measure global poverty solely by a higher poverty line because a large number of people are living in extreme poverty. Without an extremely low poverty line, we would not be able to see that a large share of the world lives in such deep poverty.
If we’d only rely on the poverty line from high-income countries, we would hide the differences between people with very different living standards. Whether someone was living on almost $30 a day or on thirty times less would not matter – they would all be considered ‘poor’.
It is however a good idea to add additional poverty lines. As the following chart shows, this can draw attention to the large income differences between people and highlights how many live on extremely low incomes. 6
The $2.15 poverty line, set by the UN, shows that globally close to one in ten people live in extreme poverty. In all these statistics, the researchers are not only taking people’s monetary income into account, but also their non-monetary income and home production. One reason why this is important is because many poor people are small-scale farmers who produce their own food. 7
The UN’s global poverty line is valuable because it has been successful in drawing attention to the terrible depths of extreme poverty of the poorest people in the world. 8
In a related essay , I focus on global poverty as defined by a higher poverty line.
The big lesson of the last 200 years: Economic growth is possible, poverty is not inevitable
What needs explanation is not poverty, but prosperity. Deep poverty was the condition that the majority of humanity has always lived in. In the pre-modern days, hunger was widespread , and every second child died no matter where in the world it was born.
Historian Michail Moatsos has recently produced a new global dataset that goes back two centuries. The chart shows his data. According to his research three-quarters of the world lived in extreme poverty in 1820. This means they "could not afford a tiny space to live, some minimum heating capacity, and food that would not induce malnutrition.” 9
The chart looks simple, but it would be a mistake to think that it was simple to produce this data. Underlying it is a wealth of careful historical research that Moatsos made use of. Historians gathered data for people around the world over two centuries to reconstruct how many of them were able to afford a set of very basic goods and services and aggregated this detailed information into this final picture. You find more information on the methodology in the footnote. 10
Economic growth made it possible to leave poverty behind
Economic growth made it possible to leave the widespread extreme poverty of the past behind. It made the difference between a society in which the majority were lacking even the most basic goods and services – food, decent housing and clothes, healthcare, public infrastructure and transport – and a society in which these products are widely available.
Growth means that a society produces an increasing quantity and quality of economic goods and services. The key to economic growth is the development of technology that makes it possible to increase productivity by which these goods and services are produced.
Because the total production in an economy equals the total income in that country – as everyone’s spending is someone else’s income – incomes grow at the same rate as production increases.
The 9 charts show the data for different regions in the world. On the horizontal axis of each chart, you find the average income (GDP per capita) and on the vertical axis you see the share living in extreme poverty. The starting point of each trajectory shows the data for 1820 and it tells us that two centuries ago the majority of people lived in extreme poverty, no matter where in the world they were at home. 11 Since then, all world regions achieved growth – the production of goods and services increased – and the share living in poverty declined.
[See also my related article: 'What is Economic Growth? ]
Most extremely poor people today are living in Africa
How far do we still have to go?
The previous chart showed that Sub-Saharan Africa is the poorest region. Almost 40% of the population lives in extreme poverty.
Not all African countries are struggling. In fact, most African countries have achieved good growth after the end of the oppressive colonial regimes that hindered the growth of African economies. But in a number of countries, the situation is bad. These countries remain as poor as they were in the past. Since the economy is stagnant, poverty is too.
In the chart below, you see that mean incomes have actually fallen in some of the world’s poorest countries. 12
To see the consequences of this, let’s first focus on one country that achieved large growth and then contrast it with a country that did not.
A country that achieved large growth is the UK: the orange distribution on the left shows incomes in the UK two centuries ago; the majority lived in extreme poverty. The green distribution shows how the distribution of incomes has changed since then. Two centuries of economic growth lifted the majority of people out of the deep poverty of the past. 13
The next chart shows the income distribution of the UK in 2019 in green – just as in the previous chart – and in red the income distribution of Madagascar, a country that did not achieve growth.
The majority of people in Madagascar still live in extreme poverty. Very similar to the global situation two centuries ago, three-quarters of Madagascar’s population are living in extreme poverty.
Not just economic growth, but also the distribution of that growth matters. If the inequality of income increases, the poorest can be left behind.
But without economic growth, there is no chance at all to leave poverty behind. The data from Madagascar makes clear that a reduction of inequality cannot end extreme poverty in a poor country. If inequality in Madagascar would be entirely eradicated, then everyone would live on the average income. In Madagascar, this is $1.60 a day. For poor countries, the only way to end poverty is an increase in incomes – economic growth.
The majority of the world is making good progress against poverty, but not all: some of the very poorest economies are stagnating
The history of extreme poverty is, at the same time, one of humanity’s greatest achievements and failures.
The majority of the world left extreme poverty behind. To me, this ranks among the most impressive and most important achievements in humanity’s history.
But, as we’ve seen, the fight against extreme poverty is far from over. Almost one in ten people still live in extreme poverty right now.
The worry with extreme poverty today is that some of the world’s poorest countries are not growing. Unless this changes, hundreds of millions of people will continue to live in extreme poverty.
Crucially this was true before the pandemic hit – even before COVID, researchers expected that half a billion people would remain in extreme poverty by 2030. The global recession that followed the pandemic exacerbated this further.
When it comes to the consequences of climate change , this is what I am most worried about. Richer people will be able to adapt in many ways. It is the extremely poor population that will be hardest hit.
The economic stagnation of some of the world's poorest countries is not as widely known as it should be. I think it deserves more attention. If the stagnation of the very poorest economies persists, we will see a growing divide at the lowest end of the global income distribution. While the living standards of the majority of the world are rising, some of the world’s very poorest people remain in extreme poverty.
Whether or not the poorest countries achieve growth is among the most important questions for the coming years. It will decide whether humanity wins its long fight against extreme poverty or not.
Last updated in 2023
This article was first published on November 22, 2021. It was last updated in August 2023.
For the moment, it is important to note that this $30 per day poverty line is defined in international-$ and therefore comparable with the ‘International Poverty Line’ discussed in the following section. More details about how to compare incomes across countries, the income concept here, and the definition of this poverty line follow further below in this text.
This is possible by relying on the work of the International Comparison Project , which monitors the prices of goods and services around the world.
Angus Deaton and Alan Heston (2010) discuss the methods behind such price adjustments and many of the difficulties and limitations involved.
Deaton, A., and Heston, A. 2010. “Understanding PPPs and PPP-Based National Accounts.” American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics 2 (4): 1–35. A working paper version is available online here .
Keep in mind that in the special case of the US, the US-$ equals the international-$.
Remember that these statistics take the cost of living into account – a person who lives on less than int-$30 is a person who cannot afford the goods and services that cost US-$30 in the US .
If you want to explore this data for any world region or any individual country, you can do so here .
See also the previous box on poverty measurement. This is, of course, also true of the historical research.
Indeed, there is an argument for using an even lower poverty line. To understand what is happening to the very poorest in the world, we need to look even lower than $2.15. This is because one of the biggest failures of development is that over the last decades, the incomes of the very poorest people have not risen. A big part of the reason for why this issue doesn’t get discussed enough is that the International Poverty Line we rely on is too high to see this fact.
Michail Moatsos (2021) – Global extreme poverty: Present and past since 1820. Published in OECD (2021), How Was Life? Volume II: New Perspectives on Well-being and Global Inequality since 1820 , OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3d96efc5-en .
The sources for the measures shown in this chart and the following chart are:
Jutta Bolt and Jan Luiten van Zanden (2021) – The GDP data in the chart is taken from The long view on economic growth: New estimates of GDP, How Was Life? Volume II: New Perspectives on Well-being and Global Inequality since 1820 , OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3d96efc5-en .
The latest datapoint for the poverty data refers to 2018, while the latest datapoint for GDP per capita in the chart below refers to 2016. In that chart, I have chosen the middle year (2017) as the reference year.
The historical poverty research was done by economic historian Michail Moatsos and is based on the ‘cost of basic needs’-approach as suggested by Robert Allen (2017) and recommended by the late Tony Atkinson.
The ‘cost of basic needs’-approach was recommended by the ‘World Bank Commission on Global Poverty’, headed by Tony Atkinson, as a complementary method in measuring poverty. The report for the ‘World Bank Commission on Global Poverty’ can be found here .
Tony Atkinson – and after his death, his colleagues – turned this report into a book that was published as Anthony B. Atkinson (2019) – Measuring Poverty around the World. You find more information on Atkinson’s website .
The CBN-approach Moatsos’ work is based on was suggested by Allen in Robert Allen (2017) – Absolute poverty: When necessity displaces desire. In American Economic Review, Vol. 107/12, pp. 3690-3721, https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20161080
Moatsos describes the methodology as follows: “In this approach, poverty lines are calculated for every year and country separately, rather than using a single global line. The second step is to gather the necessary data to operationalize this approach, alongside imputation methods in cases where not all the necessary data are available. The third step is to devise a method for aggregating countries’ poverty estimates on a global scale to account for countries that lack some of the relevant data.” In his publication – linked above – you find much more detail on all of the shown poverty data.
The speed at which extreme poverty declined increased over time, as the chart shows. Moatsos writes, “It took 136 years from 1820 for our global poverty rate to fall under 50%, then another 45 years to cut this rate in half again by 2001. In the early 21st century, global poverty reduction accelerated, and in 13 years, our global measure of extreme poverty was halved again by 2014.”
Parts of Western Europe and the US had already achieved some growth in the decades before this chart begins so that the share in poverty had already fallen, but even in 1820 the majority was still living in extreme poverty there
In the centuries and millennia before, no region in the world had achieved sustained economic growth (see, for example, my post on the Malthusian Trap and links therein). The chart here focuses on the very exceptional two last centuries when economic growth reduced widespread poverty.
You can explore related data in detail in this chart for growth measured as GDP per capita and in our Poverty Data Explorer .
The data shown in the small plots of the income distribution in the UK and Madagascar is again taken from PovcalNet – the predecessor to the World Bank's Poverty and Inequality Platform – Gapminder, and Michail Moatsos 2021.
Cite this work
Our articles and data visualizations rely on work from many different people and organizations. When citing this article, please also cite the underlying data sources. This article can be cited as:
BibTeX citation
Reuse this work freely
All visualizations, data, and code produced by Our World in Data are completely open access under the Creative Commons BY license . You have the permission to use, distribute, and reproduce these in any medium, provided the source and authors are credited.
The data produced by third parties and made available by Our World in Data is subject to the license terms from the original third-party authors. We will always indicate the original source of the data in our documentation, so you should always check the license of any such third-party data before use and redistribution.
All of our charts can be embedded in any site.
Our World in Data is free and accessible for everyone.
Help us do this work by making a donation.
A business journal from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania
Why the Fight against Poverty Is Failing: A Contrarian View
October 31, 2006 • 20 min read.
Abraham George is the founder of The George Foundation, an NGO engaged in humanitarian work in India, and the author of India Untouched: The Forgotten Face of Rural Poverty. In this contrarian essay, he explores why the current strategies that governments and development agencies are employing to reduce poverty are not working the way they should. Among his arguments: Microcredit programs, as they are now practiced in India, do little to help the poor.
- Public Policy
By the World Bank’s broad definition of poverty ($2.00 or less a day per person), there are more poor people in the world today than a quarter century ago. Nearly half the world’s population, over three billion people, lives in poverty. In India alone, two-thirds of its one billion-plus population is poor. Yet, the strategy for alleviating poverty across practically every developing nation has remained essentially the same for the past several decades.
There is plenty of talk about ways to increase income, reduce illiteracy and ill-health, and empower women. The increased attention given to these issues and pledges of additional financial assistance by world leaders are not matched by new and effective national initiatives that can significantly reduce poverty. So far, none of the poor countries has been able to achieve any of its key developmental targets. The emphasis is still on more funding for programs that have been in existence for many years. Yet these programs have had only marginal effect, and have not kept up with population increases.
My personal experience on developmental projects is confined to India, but the broader lessons learned there are applicable to most developing countries. What follows explains what I consider are misconceptions in the current approaches, and how the attack on global poverty can be far more successful.
International Development Assistance Hasn’t Worked
The UN Millennium project argues that it is the poverty trap of poor health, poor education and poor infrastructure reinforcing each other rather than bad planning, corruption, and ineffective execution that is hindering development of poor countries. The idea is that underdeveloped nations can be saved through more outside assistance and by expanding existing programs that are run mostly by governments. Those who support this notion want the World Bank and other international agencies and donors to make increased contributions to supplement domestic government resources. But there is very little evidence that foreign assistance has made much difference in overcoming the poverty trap in any country.
As a consequence of the financial assistance received from international agencies, national governments rely on strategies developed by planners at organizations such as the World Bank and the United Nations. There is no shortage of ideas, enthusiasm, and expectations at the planning level, but what is lacking is good execution.
Planners have no responsibility for ensuring that funded projects meet their goals in the field. Other than requiring periodic written reports and demonstration of individual cases where success has been prearranged, there is little feedback or accountability. Beneficiaries are not in a position to let their views be known, nor do they understand what is expected in the longer run.
Misuse of Funds
Governments, international agencies and donors have spent billions of dollars to address poverty. For example, in rural India, the government spends significant funds on subsidies (for electricity, fertilizer, fuels, etc.), food rations, price supports, land allocation/distribution, job training and financial assistance for initiatives in agriculture and small businesses. Loans from the World Bank and other international agencies and bilateral aid supplement domestic government resources. But who has benefited from all these programs and assistance?
The beneficiaries are usually corrupt officials who manage and distribute funds, and landlords and powerbrokers who directly or indirectly extract benefits for themselves. In India, over 90% of the agricultural land is owned and partly cultivated by less than 10% of the rural population who are termed farmers; others are mostly laborers. Governments allocate land to the poor, but they are unable to utilize it because of limited water resources, bad soil conditions, and/or the inability to secure credit. Larger subsidies benefit bigger farmers, but the poor do not gain much directly from any government programs.
The presumption that with more money, corrupt and inefficient governments and bureaucratic institutions will utilize funds efficiently and improve the deplorable conditions of the poor is an illusion. There are too many impediments to poverty reduction: bribery, political influence in the allocation of land and/or credit, diffused focus and priorities, poor execution, a shortage of rural infrastructure, and social inequality, among other factors. Supporters of the “more money” approach should be reminded of what the late Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi once admitted: Less than 15 cents of each dollar in assistance intended for the poor finally gets to them. That is not to say that assistance should not be increased. But the real focus should be on ensuring that the allocated resources reach the poor.
Corruption and misallocation of development funds are ultimately the result of failed governance. Why bad governance? Unethical and illegal practices flourish in countries without free and independent press to investigate wrongful practices. Where the press is not sufficiently strong, there is little chance of preventing the “opportunistic behavior” of individuals, businesses and officials. Corruption can be reduced by assuring press freedom and strengthening private social institutions (such as advocacy groups) that stay independent. (Surprisingly, a democracy like India does not permit private radio stations to broadcast daily news!)
If citizens cannot rely on an impartial judicial system, there is little hope for a just and fair society. Societies that do not protect property and persone from predators cannot expect to create sufficient wealth for everyone. It is the erosion of press independence and the weakness of legal system that are most troubling.
The Limited Role of NGOs
There are several participants in the developmental arena: national and foreign governments, international agencies, private companies and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The role of NGOs has gained attention in recent years as they focus on micro-issues and provide grass-roots assistance. Many have taken up projects to improve the quality of education and healthcare, while focusing on specific critical areas such as HIV/AIDS, illiteracy and women’s empowerment.
NGOs have been advocates for the poor, pointing out issues of concern and presenting ideas for improvement, often figuring out how to press through the corrupt and self-serving regulations faced by their beneficiaries. Several are involved in income generation activities, offering microcredit or assisting with water resource management and use of indigenous technology. Some private companies have formed NGOs to attract grants from their governments and international agencies. These efforts usually complement those of governments in the implementation process.
Despite positive contributions, NGOs have not been involved in major developmental undertakings intended to create large employment and wide income generation through sustainable businesses. This is attributable to their lacking good managerial skills and organizational structure to take up business ventures. Further, donor funds are usually restricted to narrowly defined projects. Consequently, the role that NGOs are best suited to play is in support of projects funded by governments and international agencies, or those limited initiatives approved by private donors.
Unfortunately, those NGOs that actually carry out developmental work in the field are stuck within programs specified by planners in developmental agencies and donor institutions. New ideas that deviate from those already specified by planners seldom qualify for any funding. Thus, project proposals are prepared to reflect the requirements set by these planners in terms of methodology and outcomes. There is little initiative from the ground up, and no real feedback. Demonstrating compliance on paper ends up more important than actually getting the job done effectively. As a result, recipients of developmental funds spend significant time preparing reports for the planners to qualify for continued funding, and less time worrying about what benefits the poor.
Microfinance Is Not a Panacea
The expression “social entrepreneurship” was coined to reflect corporate benevolence toward the poor. Muhammad Yunus, who founded the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh in 1976, intended exactly that when he started giving poor people credit and assisting them in their local business ventures. Subsequently, many NGOs around the world started offering small loans to women who could otherwise not obtain credit from commercial banks. As different microcredit programs sprang up in poor countries, governments, international agencies and private donors joined in with necessary capital. Several experts in these institutions termed microcredit a revolutionary concept, and there is growing belief among many that it might be the way to solve poverty.
Today, some for-profit funds and supposedly not-for-profit organizations market microcredit lending in developing countries, and even offer advertised returns on investment. One such microcredit intermediary in India recently publicized that it has been charging 36% interest until recently, when it dropped the rate to 26% for some borrowers by making the lending process more efficient. After all, it argued, credit card companies charge as high as 28% interest for credit-risk customers.
The assumption is that poor people can be rescued quickly and easily with a modicum of money. (Microcredit is intended mainly for starting or expanding small businesses run by borrowers.) The claim is that microcredit (loans of around $100) has lifted tens of millions out of poverty in the developing world. However, assertions that more than 90% of the people who receive microcredit are poor, that most of them succeed in businesses started with these loans, and that they repay the loans at 24% annual interest or higher, go unchallenged.
So far, there has not been any outcry on the high rate of interest. The poor do not have any voice in, or understanding of, financial markets. They are happy to get loans to meet personal emergencies (such as expenses toward surgery, marriage or dowry) or to pay off financial obligations to local money lenders who charge even higher rates. Microcredit intermediaries claim that this is social entrepreneurship, and not living on the backs of the poor.
In my personal experience in rural India, I have observed that a small number of people, mostly village leaders and their family members, operate the few shops and businesses. They are the only ones who have the support mechanisms, knowledge, and skills to make a business succeed. A great majority of the poor rural populations do not have the ability or experience to start or run businesses, with or without access to credit. To expect them to succeed in business is unrealistic. They are uneducated and labor for landowners and for the few nearby businesses. At best, they might benefit from the trickle down effect if landlords and small businesses prosper.
The George Foundation is engaged in poverty alleviation projects in rural Tamil Nadu, India, focusing on income generation activities, education, healthcare and community development. The foundation has studied some 17 villages and over 50 microcredit programs in South India. Data show that less than 5% of those receiving micro-loans start any business of their own. One preferred activity is buying and selling sheep, hopefully at a profit equal to the wages foregone. These types of activities are unsustainable in the long run. Consequently, less than 2% continue beyond the first three years, and very f ew succeed in any such “business” with small amounts of money and little or no support, training, or skills.
Microcredit lenders are not concerned about what the borrowers do with their loans. Loans are usually made to individuals, but guaranteed by groups that can demonstrate their capacity to repay. Most borrowers of microcredit repay loans from income received at regular jobs, or from grants provided by governments for self-help programs. Not surprisingly, it is the intermediaries — commercial banks and loan facilitators — that gain the most from the spread between the cost of funds for the intermediaries and the loan interest charged by them. Commercial banks in India, for example, receive funds for microcredit programs from the government-run NABARD bank at 5% to 6%. They then lend at 10% to12% to a microcredit intermediary which, in turn, lends at 24% to 36% to the final borrower.
The assurance of loan repayment makes microcredit popular among lenders, in addition to the high interest charged. Borrowers are motivated to repay loans because of an expectation of future monetary benefits. If one borrows and repays twice (no need to start any business, but maintain good paperwork), then he/she becomes eligible for a grant for $100 or more from a separate government program (each state offers its own variation of this facility). The free money from the government can be used to repay the third micro-loan made to that beneficiary. The government is short the amount of the grant, but the borrower is debt free, and the microcredit middle man is assured of capital and high returns.
Why this round about way to offer free money when there are several direct means to reduce the debt burden of the poor? The answer probably lies in the fact that this form of “hand-out” is invisible within “social entrepreneurships”. Moreover, major financial institutions have become embroiled in this commercial activity. A new breed of educated and well-trained loan sharks, with bank support, is now in the microcredit business in India. Microcredit has become a trendy cure-all. If poverty alleviation were a matter of lending, the world could eradicate poverty easily. It would cost about $300 billion at $100 per person — a small sum in comparison to the trillions of dollars already expended over the past half a century. The present form of microcredit, as practiced in India, results in little or no sustainable development benefit for the poor.
Importance of Private Sector Participation
In developing countries, the government bears the primary responsibility for delivering basic services for the poor. It has traditionally been the agent for healthcare, education and job training, especially due to the inability of rural populations to pay for basic services. A significant portion of the costs associated with public services will continue to be borne by the state until rural incomes rise and/or until the private sector finds it attractive to be involved in such efforts.
Government-run institutions have, for the most part, failed to offer quality services because they are unable to motivate those who carry out the tasks in the field. Those who can afford to pay for quality services rely on private providers. Even those who work for government go to private clinics for their healthcare needs, and send their children to private schools. Quality will never improve unless service providers have the incentive to serve the poor. Until then, the “haves” have markets to choose from, while the “have-nots” have bureaucrats to dictate to them.
But, lack of affordability should not prohibit private sector participation. With NGOs as project facilitators, opportunities exist for public-private partnership. Private institutions can deliver services at reduced prices, but at a profit, within a competitive and independently monitored system where the costs are subsidized or even fully paid for by the government.
In developing countries there is no serious effort to involve private companies, though most rural areas are, in fact, ideally suited for industries in herbal products , alternate fuels, cement and tile, lumber and pulp, meat, dairy and poultry. These private industries should function in a free market with sufficient checks and balances to ensure that they operate in a socially and environmentally responsible manner. By offering job opportunities in villages, they would alleviate migration to cities for employment.
Financial incentives like low-interest loans and tax breaks, and physical infrastructure improvements will motivate private companies to build factories in rural areas. Elimination of controls on the sale of agricultural products, and assistance in finding new markets will attract many businesses. These measures will in turn improve the demand for produce and boost commodity prices to levels that can financially sustain rural families. Further, international agencies and donors must consider equity participation in companies instead of simply channeling funds through governments or offering grants. They should provide loans at low interest rates directly to local entrepreneurs who can demonstrate an ability to run successful businesses. In short, some of the available developmental funds must be used to support commercial activities in deprived communities. With more economic activity, the poor labor class can gain employment at better wages.
Government’s role ought to be that of a catalyst. There should be no room for bribes. The focus should be to provide incentives for private (and community) participation. When private individuals and institutions find it worthwhile to take risks and invest in economically depressed areas, there will be sustainable development and poverty reduction. As incomes rise, there will be less need for government involvement in the delivery of many services currently provided.
It is not money alone but integrity and ideas that will make the real difference. A noted economist once asked me how I would go about improving the productivity of rural laborers on our farms. Creative thinking was my thought! We have instituted a program of de-worming drugs every six months, and daily iron tablets and protein-rich nutritional supplements prepared from locally available grains and nuts. Our workers wear wide hats protecting them from direct sunlight. These are simple, low cost measures, but they have contributed to a healthier and more productive labor force on our farms. For less than $10 per person a year, we have doubled their productivity!
A New Model for Corporate Philanthropy
Contrary to the recognized activities of NGOs, our foundation has embarked on a path similar to those of private organizations: We build institutions, develop human resources and managerial skills, and undertake major commercial projects — for humanitarian reasons. One project currently underway is a 250-acre banana farm, the second largest in South India. My life-long experience in business, my convictions about free and open markets and the need to encourage an entrepreneurial spirit in the individual have helped me not to rely on donor funds alone. Instead, our foundation has invested in sustainable projects that generate “profits” as well as steady income for the poor.
Our decision to confine business activities to farming results from the fact that the rural adult population in India is generally illiterate and lacks industrial skills. It is farming that gives them opportunities to better their lives; it is what villagers have a natural affinity for; and it is an industry where large numbers can be employed.
With the goal of empowering poor women and elevating their income-generating capacity, The George Foundation set up Baldev Farms, a “learn while you earn” program. The farm uses precision agricultural tools, organic fertilizers and superior technology in drip irrigation to conserve water. Apart from the farm workers’ daily wages, we set a portion of the profits generated from the sale of produce in a savings account to be used at the end of five years for the purchase of one third to one half acre of land for each family. Families will then cultivate their newly purchased land, sharing resources, such as wells and tractors. The foundation will remain a support organization to help address concerns and difficulties, while also offering know-how and access to markets.
Within three years of starting Baldev Farms, more than 150 villagers, mostly women, have found labor and supervisory employment in the field; hundreds of others have benefited indirectly. Most have already come out of poverty, paid off their debt and freed themselves from bonded labor status. As the foundation expands its farming activity in high-value fruits and vegetables, it will soon generate sufficient cash flow to finance other humanitarian initiatives.
Though the final chapter on this program is not yet written, the concept of offering each poor family a piece of the land to cultivate profitable crops is proving to be sound. With the profit sharing plan in place, everyone in our farm is highly motivated, takes initiatives and works hard. It is becoming increasingly clear to us that good management and a dedicated work force are assuring profitability to empower the poor.
Admittedly, our “corporate” approach to philanthropy cannot be replicated by most NGOs. Only private for-profit companies have skill bases and resources to undertake such business ventures. But they must recognize that market opportunities can be tapped only when the purchasing power of consumers rises. Hence, for the foreseeable future, investment in the rural sector ought to be toward production as opposed to selling to the “bottom of the pyramid.” In the longer run, it is competitive markets and involvement of the community in sustainable development projects that will solve poverty.
As long as significant poverty exists around the world, and the disparity between the rich and the poor widens, private companies in developing countries need to make a contribution to solving the problem. A dialogue must begin between and among business leaders on devising rules for business conduct in deprived communities. The model must consider how poor people can be brought into the mainstream of consumers with sufficient purchasing power within a reasonable time period. Those who work must earn enough to be able to come out of poverty. Minimum wages and benefits must be adequate to meet at least basic human needs, and farmers must be able to sell their crops at prices that assure a fair net gain. Economic success and social justice must go hand in hand.
There is serious concern in many circles, and rightly so, about whether the private sector can be trusted to operate fairly in communities that are poor. The fear is that free markets mean exploitation, citing what they call the “Wal-Mart Syndrome” of forcing suppliers, especially those from poor countries, to offer products at prices that leave little gain for workers.
Troubling issues like this one will always exist. But they can be addressed through effective enforcement of laws and regulations concerning minimum wages, worker safety and benefits, non-competitive practices and environmental protection. Private companies must resist the temptation to extract government funds for their business activities in the name of social entrepreneurship. They must recognize that it is in their long-term interest to win the support of the communities where they operate. Repressive local norms in compensation and treatment of labor must be replaced with fair practices that assist the poor in adequately caring for their families. Market forces of supply and demand and competition for gaining a dedicated labor force and loyal consumers are powerful factors in motivating good behavior on the part of corporations.
There are no easy answers. Poverty, in large part, can be solved if the poor gain new skills and if more jobs become available in the rural sector. For some, the solution lies in ownership of a permanent income generating asset: land. The poor need to have the opportunity to own and develop land, and grow profitable crops that can be sold in a competitive market.
More money is not a prerequisite for success; proper use of available funds is. There is no substitute for good planning, effective organization and execution with accountability. Only those who bear financial risk can be expected to perform effectively.
Handouts will not solve poverty; neither will it be solved by grand government projects, or by piecemeal interventions of NGOs. Instead, poverty will be solved with vibrant economic activity driven mostly by the private sector. The hundreds of millions of new jobs that are needed each year will come mainly from corporate business ventures in rural areas. The developmental strategy to address poverty must embrace this reality.
A market-based approach to poverty reduction will result in income and wealth creation, and lay the groundwork for the next generation to avail of a wider range of opportunities with enhanced resources.
More From Knowledge at Wharton
The Truth About Immigration | Zeke Hernandez
Fertility Rates Are Declining. Is Tech to Blame?
How Foreign Income Tax Impacts U.S. Workers
Looking for more insights.
Sign up to stay informed about our latest article releases.
5 Essays About Poverty Everyone Should Know
Poverty is one of the driving forces of inequality in the world. Between 1990-2015, much progress was made. The number of people living on less than $1.90 went from 36% to 10%. However, according to the World Bank , the COVID-19 pandemic represents a serious problem that disproportionately impacts the poor. Research released in February of 2020 shows that by 2030, up to ⅔ of the “global extreme poor” will be living in conflict-affected and fragile economies. Poverty will remain a major human rights issue for decades to come. Here are five essays about the issue that everyone should know:
“We need an economic bill of rights” – Martin Luther King Jr.
The Guardian published an abridged version of this essay in 2018, which was originally released in Look magazine just after Dr. King was killed. In this piece, Dr. King explains why an economic bill of rights is necessary. He points out that while mass unemployment within the black community is a “social problem,” it’s a “depression” in the white community. An economic bill of rights would give a job to everyone who wants one and who can work. It would also give an income to those who can’t work. Dr. King affirms his commitment to non-violence. He’s fully aware that tensions are high. He quotes a spiritual, writing “timing is winding up.” Even while the nation progresses, poverty is getting worse.
This essay was reprinted and abridged in The Guardian in an arrangement with The Heirs to the Estate of Martin Luther King. Jr. The most visible representative of the Civil Rights Movement beginning in 1955, Dr. King was assassinated in 1968. His essays and speeches remain timely.
“How Poverty Can Follow Children Into Adulthood” – Priyanka Boghani
This article is from 2017, but it’s more relevant than ever because it was written when 2012 was the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. That’s no longer the case. In 2012, around ¼ American children were in poverty. Five years later, children were still more likely than adults to be poor. This is especially true for children of colour. Consequences of poverty include anxiety, hunger, and homelessness. This essay also looks at the long-term consequences that come from growing up in poverty. A child can develop health problems that affect them in adulthood. Poverty can also harm a child’s brain development. Being aware of how poverty affects children and follows them into adulthood is essential as the world deals with the economic fallout from the pandemic.
Priyanka Boghani is a journalist at PBS Frontline. She focuses on U.S. foreign policy, humanitarian crises, and conflicts in the Middle East. She also assists in managing Frontline’s social accounts.
“5 Reasons COVID-19 Will Impact the Fight to End Extreme Poverty” – Leah Rodriguez
For decades, the UN has attempted to end extreme poverty. In the face of the novel coronavirus outbreak, new challenges threaten the fight against poverty. In this essay, Dr. Natalie Linos, a Harvard social epidemiologist, urges the world to have a “social conversation” about how the disease impacts poverty and inequality. If nothing is done, it’s unlikely that the UN will meet its Global Goals by 2030. Poverty and COVID-19 intersect in five key ways. For one, low-income people are more vulnerable to disease. They also don’t have equal access to healthcare or job stability. This piece provides a clear, concise summary of why this outbreak is especially concerning for the global poor.
Leah Rodriguez’s writing at Global Citizen focuses on women, girls, water, and sanitation. She’s also worked as a web producer and homepage editor for New York Magazine’s The Cut.
“Climate apartheid”: World’s poor to suffer most from disasters” – Al Jazeera and news Agencies
The consequences of climate change are well-known to experts like Philip Alston, the special rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights. In 2019, he submitted a report to the UN Human Rights Council sounding the alarm on how climate change will devastate the poor. While the wealthy will be able to pay their way out of devastation, the poor will not. This will end up creating a “climate apartheid.” Alston states that if climate change isn’t addressed, it will undo the last five decades of progress in poverty education, as well as global health and development .
“Nickel and Dimed: On (not) getting by in America” – Barbara Ehrenreich
In this excerpt from her book Nickel and Dimed, Ehrenreich describes her experience choosing to live undercover as an “unskilled worker” in the US. She wanted to investigate the impact the 1996 welfare reform act had on the working poor. Released in 2001, the events take place between the spring of 1998 and the summer of 2000. Ehrenreich decided to live in a town close to her “real life” and finds a place to live and a job. She has her eyes opened to the challenges and “special costs” of being poor. In 2019, The Guardian ranked the book 13th on their list of 100 best books of the 21st century.
Barbara Ehrenreich is the author of 21 books and an activist. She’s worked as an award-winning columnist and essayist.
You may also like
15 Political Issues We Must Address
15 Trusted Charities Fighting for LGBTQ+ Rights
16 Inspiring Civil Rights Leaders You Should Know
15 Trusted Charities Fighting for Housing Rights
15 Examples of Gender Inequality in Everyday Life
11 Approaches to Alleviate World Hunger
15 Facts About Malala Yousafzai
12 Ways Poverty Affects Society
15 Great Charities to Donate to in 2024
15 Quotes Exposing Injustice in Society
14 Trusted Charities Helping Civilians in Palestine
The Great Migration: History, Causes and Facts
About the author, emmaline soken-huberty.
Emmaline Soken-Huberty is a freelance writer based in Portland, Oregon. She started to become interested in human rights while attending college, eventually getting a concentration in human rights and humanitarianism. LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and climate change are of special concern to her. In her spare time, she can be found reading or enjoying Oregon’s natural beauty with her husband and dog.
Aspects of Global Poverty Research Paper
- To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
- As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
- As a template for you assignment
Introduction
Aspects of global poverty.
Poverty is a very critical global issues that affects a majority of people from different parts of the world including the developed and the developing countries. This is brought about by poor living conditions where the income earning is far below the poverty line with combination of other factors like economic inflation and recession hence the inability to live a normal life above poverty level (Jones 11).
This piece of work looks into the different aspects associated with global poverty with much emphasis being given to the causes, the extent to which it has spread and the various ways of reducing and eliminating it.
There are various aspects that are linked with global poverty each of them contributing to our understanding on the general concept of global poverty.
There are arguments that have been put forth in regard to the causes of poverty in various nations with some people saying that the governments in various nations are there to be blamed for their poor policies while others argue that the poor are to blame for their own state as it is as a result of poor decisions and lack of positive efforts to save their situation.
All in all it is evident that every party has its part to play in order to deal with this ordeal that has affected a majority of people rather than blaming one another for what has already happened (Barr 27).
There are various causes of poverty for instance bad governance in terms of policy making and implementation where equality is not adhered to, lack of individual responsibility where people do not do anything about their deteriorating situations, destruction of the environment due to human indulgence in environmental unfriendly operations making it unproductive, exploitation of people by those with power for instance business enterprises or even a combination of some of these aspects (Shah par 3).
Poverty rates in many countries have risen with the economic crisis and recession which has in a way resulted to decreased loss of value of other currencies especially with respect to the dollar making it very hard for local people to make ends meet. The gap between the rich and the poor is also very wide where the rich have more than enough while the poor are left to struggle in very difficult situations.
The rich usually have a say in various policies formulation while the poor are powerless and not influential in any way hence making it difficult for them to escape poverty (Garcia 45).
According to Cook (par 6), more than forty millions Americans are officially poor with about ninety millions struggling to make ends meet and thus could be classified as poor or near the poverty line. He added that in addressing the poverty problem then policies must be put in place that ensures that the gap between the rich and the poor is narrowed. Despite the fact that poverty is a problem by itself, it is also associated with other problems for instance increased rates of crime and violence.
This is so because when people are poor, they tend to try all means to save their situations and hide their frustration and indulging in criminal activities like drug trafficking, substance abuse among others is usually a quick option to them. Hunger is also another aspect that is linked to poverty and it has had many adverse effects to individuals including deaths and so in order to eliminate hunger in the world, there is dire need to deal with the issue of poverty (Rivlin 53).
Poverty is a global issue and has affected a majority of people and there is therefore a need for various parties like the government, public organizations, private agencies as well as individual well wishers to join hands in an effort to alleviate this ordeal and save people from suffering from the adverse effects of poverty.
“Opportunity, empowerment, and security have intrinsic value for poor people. And given the important complementarities among them, an effective poverty reduction strategy will require action on all three fronts, by the full range of agents in society—government, civil” (Lodge and Wilson 102)
Stoner ( 112) asserts that there are various moves that can be adopted to deal with poverty for instance technical measures that allow for meaningful and long term solution for example improving the agricultural sector and also investing in empowerment projects aimed at providing individuals with a stable source of income which will in return make their living conditions better and bearable.
Promotion of opportunities is also a key aspect that can help in curbing the issue of global poverty. It entails the expansion of economic opportunities for the poor in various nations through the stimulation of the overall growth and building up assets as well as increasing returns on the assets.
Empowering the poor in other political and social aspects is also a recommended step which entails making state related institutions to be more accountable and responsive to the less fortunate individuals for instance through involving them in various political and social decision making which will in return ensure that their needs are incorporated in the policies and decision making procedures.
Empowering of the poor people will also ensure that the social barriers that exist between the poor and the rich are eliminated (Rector par 6). Security is also a critical issue when it comes to the concept of global poverty.
To curb poverty among the populations, it is important that the vulnerability of poor people to various poverty aspects like poor health, natural disasters, displacements, violence and discrimination, among others are reduced as well as laying down strategies that are necessary in coping with these problems in case they occur such that the poor people do not suffer much.
The above measures are positive and should be recommended as compared to provision of food aid which in the long run exacerbate the poverty situation as it only provide for a short term solution which make the vulnerable people more dependent and expecting food aid all the time an aspect that is not good (World bank 51).
It is evident that global poverty is an issue of concern and it cannot go unmentioned when it comes to the discussion of the ordeals facing people in various nations in the world especially the third world countries.
It is a condition that has caused a lot of negative effects to human beings for instance heath problems brought about by poor living conditions and insufficient and inappropriate nutrition coupled with poor health facilities. To the extreme end, global poverty has resulted to deaths of many people including children and adults where they are unable to withstand the adverse effects associated with poverty.
Barr, Nicholas. The economics of the welfare state . Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1993.
Cook, Richard. ‘‘Sustainable Economics to End Global Poverty’’. Global Research 2007. Web.
Garcia, Ginny. Mexican American and Immigrant Poverty in the United States . New York: Springer, 2011.
Jones Gruffydd Branwen. Explaining Global Poverty: A Critical Realist Approach . New York: Taylor & Francis, 2006.
Lodge, George and Wilson, Craig. A corporate Solution to Global Poverty: How Multinationals Can Help the Poor and Invigorate Their Own Legitimacy . New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2006
Rector, Robert. “ Understanding and Reducing Poverty in America ”. The Heritage Foundation. 2008. Web.
Rivlin, Gary. Broke, USA: From Pawnshops to Poverty . New York: Harper Business INC, 2010.
Shah, Anup. “ Causes of Poverty ”. Global Issues 2011. Web.
Stoner Finch Arthur James. Innovative Approaches to Reducing Global Poverty . USA: IAP, 2007
World Bank. Causes of Poverty and a Framework for Action. World Development Report 2000/2001.
- Empowering People and Fostering Teamwork
- Government Initiatives for Market Expansion and Empowering Consumers
- Empowering Through Information Literacy
- Feasibility study for a new business
- “The 2010 Federal Reserve Payments Study”
- Obama's Speech on 2012 Budget Cuts
- Employing the Foreign Direct Investment Confidence Index
- Macroeconomic Policies in Australia
- Chicago (A-D)
- Chicago (N-B)
IvyPanda. (2018, May 30). Aspects of Global Poverty. https://ivypanda.com/essays/global-poverty/
"Aspects of Global Poverty." IvyPanda , 30 May 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/global-poverty/.
IvyPanda . (2018) 'Aspects of Global Poverty'. 30 May.
IvyPanda . 2018. "Aspects of Global Poverty." May 30, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/global-poverty/.
1. IvyPanda . "Aspects of Global Poverty." May 30, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/global-poverty/.
Bibliography
IvyPanda . "Aspects of Global Poverty." May 30, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/global-poverty/.
Poverty Essay for Students and Children
500+ words essay on poverty essay.
“Poverty is the worst form of violence”. – Mahatma Gandhi.
How Poverty is Measured?
For measuring poverty United nations have devised two measures of poverty – Absolute & relative poverty. Absolute poverty is used to measure poverty in developing countries like India. Relative poverty is used to measure poverty in developed countries like the USA. In absolute poverty, a line based on the minimum level of income has been created & is called a poverty line. If per day income of a family is below this level, then it is poor or below the poverty line. If per day income of a family is above this level, then it is non-poor or above the poverty line. In India, the new poverty line is Rs 32 in rural areas and Rs 47 in urban areas.
Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas
Causes of Poverty
According to the Noble prize winner South African leader, Nelson Mandela – “Poverty is not natural, it is manmade”. The above statement is true as the causes of poverty are generally man-made. There are various causes of poverty but the most important is population. Rising population is putting the burden on the resources & budget of countries. Governments are finding difficult to provide food, shelter & employment to the rising population.
The other causes are- lack of education, war, natural disaster, lack of employment, lack of infrastructure, political instability, etc. For instance- lack of employment opportunities makes a person jobless & he is not able to earn enough to fulfill the basic necessities of his family & becomes poor. Lack of education compels a person for less paying jobs & it makes him poorer. Lack of infrastructure means there are no industries, banks, etc. in a country resulting in lack of employment opportunities. Natural disasters like flood, earthquake also contribute to poverty.
In some countries, especially African countries like Somalia, a long period of civil war has made poverty widespread. This is because all the resources & money is being spent in war instead of public welfare. Countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, etc. are prone to natural disasters like cyclone, etc. These disasters occur every year causing poverty to rise.
Ill Effects of Poverty
Poverty affects the life of a poor family. A poor person is not able to take proper food & nutrition &his capacity to work reduces. Reduced capacity to work further reduces his income, making him poorer. Children from poor family never get proper schooling & proper nutrition. They have to work to support their family & this destroys their childhood. Some of them may also involve in crimes like theft, murder, robbery, etc. A poor person remains uneducated & is forced to live under unhygienic conditions in slums. There are no proper sanitation & drinking water facility in slums & he falls ill often & his health deteriorates. A poor person generally dies an early death. So, all social evils are related to poverty.
Government Schemes to Remove Poverty
The government of India also took several measures to eradicate poverty from India. Some of them are – creating employment opportunities , controlling population, etc. In India, about 60% of the population is still dependent on agriculture for its livelihood. Government has taken certain measures to promote agriculture in India. The government constructed certain dams & canals in our country to provide easy availability of water for irrigation. Government has also taken steps for the cheap availability of seeds & farming equipment to promote agriculture. Government is also promoting farming of cash crops like cotton, instead of food crops. In cities, the government is promoting industrialization to create more jobs. Government has also opened ‘Ration shops’. Other measures include providing free & compulsory education for children up to 14 years of age, scholarship to deserving students from a poor background, providing subsidized houses to poor people, etc.
Poverty is a social evil, we can also contribute to control it. For example- we can simply donate old clothes to poor people, we can also sponsor the education of a poor child or we can utilize our free time by teaching poor students. Remember before wasting food, somebody is still sleeping hungry.
Customize your course in 30 seconds
Which class are you in.
- Travelling Essay
- Picnic Essay
- Our Country Essay
- My Parents Essay
- Essay on Favourite Personality
- Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
- Essay on Knowledge is Power
- Essay on Gurpurab
- Essay on My Favourite Season
- Essay on Types of Sports
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Download the App
Home / Essay Samples / Social Issues / Food Shortage / Persuading Society to Address Poverty: A Call to Action
Persuading Society to Address Poverty: A Call to Action
- Category: Economics , Social Issues
- Topic: Economic Problem , Food Shortage , Hunger
Pages: 3 (1246 words)
- Downloads: -->
- Bibliography
- Global poverty and hunger: take action . (2019). Retrieved from Action against
- Poverty in Africa. (2019). Retrieved from children international
- Rachelk. (2012, June 7). Speech on Poverty
- The top 9 causes of global poverty . (2019, February 4). Retrieved from Concern worldwide US
--> ⚠️ Remember: This essay was written and uploaded by an--> click here.
Found a great essay sample but want a unique one?
are ready to help you with your essay
You won’t be charged yet!
2Nd Amendment Essays
Privacy Essays
Civil Rights Essays
Affirmative Action Essays
Daca Essays
Related Essays
We are glad that you like it, but you cannot copy from our website. Just insert your email and this sample will be sent to you.
By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.
Your essay sample has been sent.
In fact, there is a way to get an original essay! Turn to our writers and order a plagiarism-free paper.
samplius.com uses cookies to offer you the best service possible.By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .--> -->